The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1887-12-24
disappearing the Democratic
Party.

rrzSbe Message of the Chief Executive is re-
ria. several respects, but in none
than in the complete yeri6cation it
meto the oft-repeated- assertions that the
Rlocratic party was Free Trade Associa-
,on.-Ffedpick Examiner.
Is the advocacy of reduction of the
tariff to revenue basis free trade?
Is it right and proper to collect annually
from the people S10O,000,O00 more than
the legitimate needs Of tie gocernmeat!9
Is there any warrant in the constitution
to do so?
Does the constitution anywhere sanction
the levy of tax to protect individuals or
monopolies?
If American manufactures are 'infant
industries" after quarter of century of
high protection, when will they become
grown?
Is it right that three. toarths of the in
ha5itants be required to pay tribute to the
other fourth?
The Examiners paragraph is either
thoughtless or the result of ignorance.
There has never been free trade party in
this country, and never will be. All the
people are, and have ever been, averse to
direct taxation, and the policy of the coun-
try is, and has always been, to raise revenue
for its support by indirect means, and that
;,d;raot W aonc hos oonet;tufionoJ eannfinn
Section 8, Article l, says .The Congress
shall have power to lay and collect taxes,
duties, imports and excuses, to pay the debts
and provide for the common defence and
general welfare of the United States
This provision does not sanction the
doctrine or practice of protection 1t can
not come under the general welfare of the
United States" for it cannot be for the
general welfare" to tax the many for
the benefit of the few. Such doctrine is
unrepublican and unjust.
While Mr.. Cleveland favors a tariff for
revenue, he recognizes the fact that man
ufactures have been unduly stimulated by
high tariffs, and is particular to caution the
Congress against any rude shock to such
interests. Here is his plain language
at is not proposed to entirely relieve the
country of this taxation. 1t mnst be extern
siyely continued as the source of the govern
ments income, and in a REIMBURSEMENT of our
tariff the interests Of American labor engaged
in manufacture should be carefully consider
cd, as well as the preservation of our manu-
facturers. il may be called protection, or by
any other name, but relief from the hardships
and dangers Of our present tariff laws should
be devised with especial preeautien against
imperiling the existence of ourmanniaetnring
interests. Bat This existence should not
mean a condition which, without regard to
the public welfare or a national exigency,
must always insure the realization of immense
profits instead of moderately profitable re-
turns. y
Certainly the EsaHiisey is not familiar
with the Presidents message, or it could
not have asserted that the President or the
Democratic party favored free trade.
The government requires about $780,
000,O00 dollars annually fer legitimate ex-
penses. This must be raised chiefly by
import duties, and consequently protection
is incidentally afforded American industries.
Therefore there can never be free trade,
because the people are averso to direct tax
alton, and there win always be considerable
protection when a tarif for reseane Is laid.